The Real Way to Protect Marriage

[Deicide]

aside from the piece of paper, do they still have the familiy structure?  do they still have man/woman/baby under most roofs?

Sure but gay marriage/civil unions are legal as well.

[MCWAY]

Perhaps, it's because divorce is allowed (Scripturally speaking), in certain cases, most notably ADULTERY.

The marriage vows include, "forsaking all others", "for richer or poorer", "love, honor, cherish", giving yourself ONLY to your husband/wife, etc.

If those vows are broken, then something has to be done to either reconcile or terminate the marriage. I get your point that people are friviously divorcing. But, part of that may have to do with the relative ease of getting married. Perhaps, the whole dowry thing was a smart move, afterall. In OT times, people paid 50 shekels for a bride which (if you didn't have the cash up front) was 5-7 years worth of wages. Let's say the average American salary was $40,000. Can you imagine having to cough up $200,000 for a wife? No wonder dudes back then were enraged if their brides weren't virgins!!!

What about mandatory marriage counseling? Not the kind that people get, when their marriage is on the brink of doom, but BEFORE they tie the knot. A lot of churches offer that; some pastors will not marry a couple, until they've been through their particular marriage counseling classes.

However, most pastors don't mandate such a thing. And, since the government doesn't either, a couple can simply shop around their city to find a pastor that will do the ceremony, without counseling beforehand.

The one problem I'd see with mandatory marriage counseling would involve the clash of ideas, between religious-based marriage principles and non-religious ones.

But, it's a start.

To piggyback on this, what about the concept of a mandatory "bethroment" period? In Biblical times, I believe a couple was bethroed (engaged) for a year, before the marriage was finalized. This would also explain why the parents made the arrangements.

Part of it was a logistical thing, i.e. making sure the hubby-to-be had the skills to pay the bills (a steady job, decent credit, a functional home/apartment, etc.).

[drkaje]

Reality is the biggest challenge to marriage, Straw Man.

[MCWAY]

Reality is the biggest challenge to marriage, Straw Man.

To quote a famous pastor, Love is a dream; marriage is the alarm clock!

[MB]

Marriages should have an expiration date, just like your license.  After 5 years, you can either re-commit for another 5 or opt out.  Get rid of divorce all-together.  People would be a lot happier and more honest about the state of their relationship with their husband/wife.   

[loco]

Nope!! My anniversary is in a week and a half. So it's more lovin' for me and the Mrs. 

MCWAY, Congratulations, both on your anniversary and also on having a good wife and a happy marriage!   

[loco]

An experienced marriage counselor said that when couples "falls in love" the euphoria lasts about two years at the most.  So he advices couples who "are in love" to date for two years or more, after which, if they still want to spend the rest of their life together, then that's when they should consider marriage. 

The problem is that too many couples today get married first, driven by the euphoria, and divorce after the euphoria passes, two or so years later.

How about a law that couples must date or be engaged for at least two years before they are allowed to marry?  It's no guarantee that it will work, but it might give the marriage a much better chance.

By two years of dating before marriage, I don't mean that couples should live together for two years before they marry.  Statistically, couples who live together before they marry have an even higher divorce rate.

[JBGRAY]

The nuclear family, of which consists of a marriage between a man and a woman which forms the core, is the basis for any stable nation.  Religiously based or not, there are many examples that show that the deterioration of the nuclear family leads to increased crime and "perversions" in the nation which it exists.  The US is a great example. 

Marriage is a JOB.  It takes hard work to maintain.  There will be bumps in the road and difficulties, but they must be overcome, just like everything else in life.  Divorce is weak, and I have a much lesser opinion of anyone who went through a divorce, outside of extraordinary circumstances.

America is going down the toilet because the majority of people now come from broken families.  The traditional nuclear family is in the minority, and thanks to the sick, demented gay lobbyists who hide under the guise of such names as the "human rights commission", it is simply seen as an equivalent lifestyle choice.

[Straw Man]

I started this thread after watching stories on the news of religious nutbags disrupting gay weddings in California.

If these religious zealots are truly concerned about preserving the sanctity of marriage they should be outside divorce courts harrassing those other good christians who seem to have no problem renegging on the sacred vows that they took before the god in whom they claim to believe

In that same spirit they should have no problem if Jews or Muslims harrassed them outside McDonalds for eating a bacon cheeseburger

[kh300]

a marriage is only as good as the people who are in it. my favorite is these people who have kids, get a divorce, but reamin best friends . nice for the kids.

42 years my parents are still going strong. still get along perfect, and never want to be apart. thats a dead breed.

i dont feel like looking it up. but i'd like to see the comparision between kids with married/divorced parents, and their different stats on crime/education.

[windsor88]

I started this thread after watching stories on the news of religious nutbags disrupting gay weddings in California.

If these religious zealots are truly concerned about preserving the sanctity of marriage they should be outside divorce courts harrassing those other good christians who seem to have no problem renegging on the sacred vows that they took before the god in whom they claim to believe

In that same spirit they should have no problem if Jews or Muslims harrassed them outside McDonalds for eating a bacon cheeseburger

I like the way you think Strawman. 

[Straw Man]

I like the way you think Strawman. 

Thanks

[MCWAY]

An experienced marriage counselor said that when couples "falls in love" the euphoria lasts about two years at the most.  So he advices couples who "are in love" to date for two years or more, after which, if they still want to spend the rest of their life together, then that's when they should consider marriage. 

The problem is that too many couples today get married first, driven by the euphoria, and divorce after the euphoria passes, two or so years later.

How about a law that couples must date or be engaged for at least two years before they are allowed to marry?  It's no guarantee that it will work, but it might give the marriage a much better chance.

That sounds quite similar to the bethroment period mentioned in the Bible. Only, that period was for one year. Then again, if men had to cough up a dowry, 50 shekels (the modern equivalent being $200,000 or 5 years' wages, assuming the average USA yearly salary is 40 grand), for a wife, I think guys would think LONG AND HARD, before proposing to his sweetheart.

By two years of dating before marriage, I don't mean that couples should live together for two years before they marry.  Statistically, couples who live together before they marry have an even higher divorce rate.

That's the least of their problem. Women who shack up are FAR more likely to be victims of domestic abuse and, should they have kids from previous marriages/relationships, those children are much more likely to be molested.

I believe there was some controversy about Ohio's marriage amendment, because some plaintiffs argued that the amendment has some wording, resulting in a scenario in which the law didn't offer the same protections from the police for unmarried women, who were victims of domestic abuse, as it did for married women who were abused.

[loco]

That sound quite similar to the bethroment period mentioned in the Bible. Only, that period was for one year. Then again, if men had to cough up a dowry, 50 shekels (the modern equivalent being $200,000 or 5 years' wages, assuming the average USA yearly salary is 40 grand), for a wife, I think guys would think LONG AND HARD, before proposing to his sweetheart.

Yup, I thought about your earlier post about this as I was typing my post about waiting two years.   

That's the least of their problem. Women who shack up are FAR more likely to be victims of domestic abuse and, should have have kids from previous marriages/relationships, those children are much more likely to be molested.

I believe there was some controversy about Ohio's marriage amendment, because some plaintiffs argued that the amendment has some wording, resulting in a scenario in which the law didn't offer the same protections from the police for unmarried women, who were victims of domestic abuse, as it did for married women who were abused.

Interesting!  I did not know that. 

[MCWAY]

Yup, I thought about your earlier post about this as I was typing my post about waiting two years.   

Interesting!  I did not know that. 

Unfortunately, that is true. Shacking up is dangerous for women and it's dangerous for children, especially young girls.

[Straw Man]

Perhaps, it's because divorce is allowed (Scripturally speaking), in certain cases, most notably ADULTERY.

The marriage vows include, "forsaking all others", "for richer or poorer", "love, honor, cherish", giving yourself ONLY to your husband/wife, etc.

If those vows are broken, then something has to be done to either reconcile or terminate the marriage. I get your point that people are friviously divorcing. But, part of that may have to do with the relative ease of getting married. Perhaps, the whole dowry thing was a smart move, afterall. In OT times, people paid 50 shekels for a bride which (if you didn't have the cash up front) was 5-7 years worth of wages. Let's say the average American salary was $40,000. Can you imagine having to cough up $200,000 for a wife? No wonder dudes back then were enraged if their brides weren't virgins!!!

What about mandatory marriage counseling? Not the kind that people get, when their marriage is on the brink of doom, but BEFORE they tie the knot. A lot of churches offer that; some pastors will not marry a couple, until they've been through their particular marriage counseling classes.

However, most pastors don't mandate such a thing. And, since the government doesn't either, a couple can simply shop around their city to find a pastor that will do the ceremony, without counseling beforehand.

The one problem I'd see with mandatory marriage counseling would involve the clash of ideas, between religious-based marriage principles and non-religious ones.

But, it's a start.

Where is divorce allowed in the bible?

Do you really think we should have mandatory marriage counseling required by the government and provided by churches? 

I assume you're going to allow the 101 different kinds of christians to counsel themselves.  What about the jews, muslims, sikhs, hindu, etc.... and of course all the Agnostics, Atheists, and Undecideds.

Would you propose using my tax dollars for this venture is social science?

I think it's likely we are not the same page and probably not even in the same book

[windsor88]

Where is divorce allowed in the bible?

Do you really think we should have mandatory marriage counseling required by the government and provided by churches? 

I assume you're going to allow the 101 different kinds of christians to counsel themselves.  What about the jews, muslims, sikhs, hindu, etc.... and of course all the Agnostics, Atheists, and Undecideds.

Would you propose using my tax dollars for this venture is social science?

I think it's likely we are not the same page and probably not even in the same book

McWay gets owned again..lol.

[Straw Man]

actually I did find a bunch of references to divorce in the bible but like almost everything else in that hodgepodge of a book there are tons of contradictory passages.

[Archer77]

The nuclear family, of which consists of a marriage between a man and a woman which forms the core, is the basis for any stable nation.  Religiously based or not, there are many examples that show that the deterioration of the nuclear family leads to increased crime and "perversions" in the nation which it exists.  The US is a great example. 

Marriage is a JOB.  It takes hard work to maintain.  There will be bumps in the road and difficulties, but they must be overcome, just like everything else in life.  Divorce is weak, and I have a much lesser opinion of anyone who went through a divorce, outside of extraordinary circumstances.

America is going down the toilet because the majority of people now come from broken families.  The traditional nuclear family is in the minority, and thanks to the sick, demented gay lobbyists who hide under the guise of such names as the "human rights commission", it is simply seen as an equivalent lifestyle choice.

Id like to see some of this statistical data.  Your bias shows through in your statements and that makes is very difficult to believe there is any truth in what your saying.  It sounds like your scapegoating.

[MCWAY]

Where is divorce allowed in the bible?

You can start with Matt. 19:

Verses 4-8

And he answered and said unto them, Have ye not read, that he which made [them] at the beginning made them male and female,

 And said, For this cause shall a man leave father and mother, and shall cleave to his wife: and they twain shall be one flesh? Wherefore they are no more twain, but one flesh. What therefore God hath joined together, let not man put asunder.

They say unto him, Why did Moses then command to give a writing of divorcement, and to put her away?  He saith unto them, Moses because of the hardness of your hearts suffered you to put away your wives: but from the beginning it was not so.

Do you really think we should have mandatory marriage counseling required by the government and provided by churches? 

I assume you're going to allow the 101 different kinds of christians to counsel themselves.  What about the jews, muslims, sikhs, hindu, etc.... and of course all the Agnostics, Atheists, and Undecideds.

What about them? No one said that the churches were the only places that could provide them, just as churches aren't the only places where people get married. The point of my question was for you to ACTUALLY PROVIDE SUGGESTIONS. If you have suggestinos as to how marriage counseling should be done, let's hear it.

One of the ways to help prevent divorce is to make sure that the couple are fully aware of what they are about to undertake. Marriage counseling can help toward that effort. There are emotional, financial, spiritual, practical, and philosophical aspects to marriage. I hope you're not suggesting that the godless crew is incapable of addressing those (sans the "spiritual" ones, of course).

 

Would you propose using my tax dollars for this venture is social science?

I think it's likely we are not the same page and probably not even in the same book

That's strange. I wasn't aware that YOU were the only one who paid taxes in this country.

Since you were the one who came up with the thread about the "Real Way to Protect Marriage", I gave you the benefit of the doubt that you actually had some legitimate suggestions. Silly me!!! You're just about bleating and complaining about Christians, particularly those who disagree with you on marriage and homosexuals.

[Straw Man]

Here's my simple advice - everyone mind their own fucking business.

Gays should be allowed to marry in civil ceremonies and not be persecuted by religious nutbags

Religious nutbags should be allowed to do whatever they want provided it doesn't harm anyone else or involve having sex or abusing children

Stop deluding yourself that the bible or christianity is some kind of moral compass that need to be imposed on others.   

[MCWAY]

Here's my simple advice - everyone mind their own fucking business.

Gays should be allowed to marry in civil ceremonies and not be persecuted by religious nutbags

Religious nutbags should be allowed to do whatever they want provided it doesn't harm anyone else or involve having sex or abusing children

Stop deluding yourself that the bible or christianity is some kind of moral compass that need to be imposed on others.   

And your godless belief is a moral compass to be imposed on everyone because........

Furthermore, who says that it's wrong to abuse children or to harm anyone else? Why that would be you imposing your beliefs on rapists and child molesters everywhere. HOW DARE YOU!!!!!

And, since you're so fired up about gay "marriage", try beating the streets, get a petiton started, and go for a constitutional amendment in your home state (assuming it isn't California or Massachusetts) to get it done.

[Straw Man]

And your godless belief is a moral compass to be imposed on everyone? Why?

Furthermore, who says that it's wrong to abuse children or to harm anyone else? Why that would be you imposing your beliefs on rapists and child molesters everywhere. HOW DARE YOU!!!!!

And, since you're so fired up about gay "marriage", try beating the streets, get a petiton started, and go for a constitutional amendment in your home state (assuming it isn't California or Massachusetts) to get it done.

My moral compass is simple - you should be free to do pretty much whatever you want provided it doesn't harm, restrict or endanger others. 

Gays getting married does not in any way harm straight people who want to get married nor have any effect on the legitimacy of their marriage.  Religious kooks who feel their belief or their god is somehow threatened should take a step or two back and try to get a larger perspective and realize that not everyone shares their beliefs and they have no right to impose their beliefs on others.

As for a consititutional ammendment - I don't think it's necessary or appropriate to either allow or restrict marriage.   

[MCWAY]

My moral compass is simple - you should be free to do pretty much whatever you want provided it doesn't harm, restrict or endanger others. 

Gays getting married does not in any way harm straight people who want to get married nor have any effect on the legitimacy of their marriage.  Religious kooks who feel their belief or their god is somehow threatened should take a step or two back and try to get a larger perspective and realize that not everyone shares their beliefs and they have no right to impose their beliefs on others.

As for a consititutional ammendment - I don't think it's necessary or appropriate to either allow or restrict marriage.   

If the issues is simply a matter of shared beliefs, that still puts you in the position of imposing your beliefs unto others. If you share the belief that someone shouldn't take your property without your permission, your belief "restricts" thieves. Earlier, you mentioned that people shouldn't abuse children. That means you hold to beliefs that "restrict" pedophiles, who don't share your beliefs that getting freaky with kids is verboten.

Did you vote for raising minimum wage? If you did (but don't make minimum wage, yourself), CONGRATULATIONS!!! You've just made your voice heard on an issue that doesn't involve you directly.

With regards to your take on a constitutional amendment, if a constitutional amendment isn't necessary, then who has the moral authority to decide whether same-sex "marriage" should be legal or not and why? With an amendment (at least, at the state level), that decision rides with the people, as it will in Florida and California about 4 months from now.

[Straw Man]

If the issues is simply a matter of shared beliefs, that still puts you in the position of imposing your beliefs unto others. If you share the belief that someone shouldn't take your property without your permission, your belief "restricts" thieves. Earlier, you mentioned that people shouldn't abuse children. That means you hold to beliefs that "restrict" pedophiles, who don't share your beliefs that getting freaky with kids is verboten.

What is it about harming others that you don't understand.

Did you vote for raising minimum wage? If you did (but don't make minimum wage, yourself), CONGRATULATIONS!!! You've just made your voice heard on an issue that doesn't involve you directly.

What does this have to do with marriage and when did I say I could only vote on things that directly affected me?  BTW - I don't recall ever getting to vote on minimum wage.  Did you?

With regards to your take on a constitutional amendment, if a constitutional amendment isn't necessary, then who has the moral authority to decide whether same-sex "marriage" should be legal or not and why? With an amendment (at least, at the state level), that decision rides with the people, as it will in Florida and California about 4 months from now.

No one has the moral authority because it's not a moral issue.   It's a civil rights issue and a legal issue that has been addressed by the courts and there's simply no reason to ammend the constitution (state or federal) to make any statement about marriage 

Again, it's really simple.  If you are personally against gay marriage then you a completely free to not get "gay married"  See how easy that is.

Here's a question for you:  Should the state prevent atheist from getting married??